Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
want to ask you about susan rice, she is meeting with senators mccain, graham, and ayott. do you think she has explaining to do with what she said about benghazi? and would you support her if she is nominated for secretary of state? >> she's not yet been nominated. so i'm going to look carefully at her credentials, which i think qualify her very well to be nominated. i think she's done a very good job at the united nations. i do think she's explained that what she said about benghazi was the intelligence that she was given. and she'll have an opportunity as she meets with senators to further explain that position. >> do you think they're open to giving her a fair hearing? because some pretty tough things have been said about her. >> well, it's unfortunate that much of that discussion has gotten so personal. she does need to get a fair hearing. i'm hopeful senator mccain is a patriot, i think he'll give her a fair hearing. i'm certain my colleague from new hampshire, and of lindsey graham. so i do believe that it's in the country's interest to give her a fair hearing and to let her expl
cain and lindsey graham are so busy attacking susan rice. well maybe it's because -- think about this, if the president can't appoint susan rice, then he would have to appoint john kerry and that would open up a massachusetts senate seat for scott brown. so it could all be a way of getting back another republican in the united states senate. don't know for sure. just sayin'. all right. we'll look into that and a whole lot more here but first standing by with today's current news update, lisa ferguson in los angeles. hi lisa. take it away. >> hey bill, thanks. good morning everyone. as president heads to meet with leaders of the business world this afternoon politico is reporting that john boehner and his leadership team are making plans to meet with some of these very same executives. now the irony here is that obama and boehner still have no plans to meet themselves face-to-face. the two did meet before congress' thanksgiving recess along with the other two three members of the house and the senate. they had plans to
being made by mccain, by lindsey graham, and by senator ayotte of new hampshire is that this ambassador to the u.n. went on all the national shows, including "meet the press," in mid-september and basically tried to delay the news because it would get out eventually, that it was al qaeda that launched this attack. does that pass the smell test? that somebody would knowingly do that knowing the truth would be coming out in a matter of days? >> they still don't know who was responsible. there are links to al qaeda, they say, but links is a broad word. those links can take many forms. i think this is all a political red herrings. >> you're with tom ricks on this one. >> the main question is why was the consulate in benghazi still open when the administration, when even the ambassador acknowledged that the threats against the united states was rising and security was -- >> and the answer could be we had cia agents in that area -- >> absolutely. >> -- that needed to be protected. ambassador susan rice met with her strongest critics on capitol hill today to answer questions about benghazi, an
harshest gop critics. those senators, john mccain, lindsey graham, kelly ayotte, were not satisfied, they said, with the ambassador's explanation for her comments following the benghazi consulate attack. cnn foreign affairs reporter elise labott has more details for us. she's in washington, d.c. this morning. elise, good morning. >> hey, soledad. well, what came out in those meetings and why senators say they're even more concerned, centers around the information that the cia had just after the attack about possible involvement in the benghazi attack that killed ambassador chris stevens and those three other americans. now, ambassador rice did not make reference to this information in her talk show appearances. the unclassified talking points she used were provided by the cia, were stripped of these references to al qaeda, because the information was classified and couldn't be delivered in public. now, after the meeting, ambassador rice acknowledged those talking points turned out to be incorrect. but that she stressed she and the administration never meant to mislead the american p
meetings with senators mccain and graham and ayotte created more questions than answers. ambassador susan rice taking her case to two more republicans today. peter doocy has more. >> you are right, brian. ambassador rice will meet with susan collins from maine and bob corker from tennessee . ahead of his meeting that what worries him most about ambassador rice she may be more concerned about delivering the party line than pressuring the administration when it might be off base. three other republican senators met with the embattled ambassador and that meeting did little to quiet their harsh criticism of her job performance. >> i am more concerned than i was before that the 15th of september explan of how four americans died in benghazi, libya. >> why she wouldn't have asked i am the person who doesn't know about this and going on every show. it is not only the talking points unclassified but part of her responsibility as the ambassador . united nations she reviewed more than that. >> in a written statement she knows that the intelligence that she based her sunday swars on is wrong and the
graham. you are on the record saying you will not support her if she is nominated for secretary of state. but not just because of libya. what is the problem. >> let me clarify that. my first thought is what if susan rice was thrown under the bus and they all knew she didn't have the information from the cia. then i thought you would have to feel sorry for her. since yesterday talking to some of those to whom she talked i'm convinced in my mind that she is part of the coverup, she knew all the time the cia information that was given to her. but your point is very good. i could not support her in the secretary of state if she is nominated. bill: give me a reason why. >> she is on the wrong side of the membership of the u.n. palestinian authority. she is on the opposite side of where i am. she has kept on funding you necessary cowhich is in violation of instructions given to her through law. she is on the opposite side of every issue that i am. for that reason i would have opposed her anyway. bill: it appears to me and many others when we listen to folks like yourself talk that this issue i
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)